ReviewDer Anaesthesist2019
[Health services research in intensive care medicine in Germany : Status quo and future challenges exemplified by acute pulmonary failure].
Review in Der Anaesthesist, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Health services research (HSR) is a multidisciplinary field of research that describes disease treatment and health care and their framework conditions. In the last 20 years, the HSR aspect became more and more the clinical focus of intensive care medicine. Under this aspect HSR investigates the use of clinical measures and their impact on patient outcome under routine intensive care medical conditions. This article provides an overview of the current state of HSR in intensive care medicine in Germany using the example of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The ARDS still represents a clinical disease with high intra-hospital mortality (30-60%) despite progress in intensive care medicine. Survivors of ARDS have substantial long-term limitations on physical and mental health. The treatment of ARDS patients is tedious, laborious for intensive care unit staff and complex. Despite evident treatment recommendations, these are only insufficiently implemented in the clinical routine. With the help of quality indicators, benchmarking, certification and peer review procedures, the quality of intensive care treatment in the clinical routine can be documented and improved. An important role in HSR is patient safety and focusing on the outcome with evaluation of the patient's will. As part of the establishment of the innovation fund for HSR, promising intensive medical care projects have been promoted to improve the quality of care and the quality of long-term outcome for intensive care patients. An important focus lies on the identification of factors that improve long-term quality of life after intensive care. The expansion of registries and telemedicine in intensive care offers the opportunity to bundle and share experiences more effectively and thereby establish (guideline-based) treatment recommendations faster in the clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.